Both Rush and Hannity are saying they expect Obama to invoke new anti-civil rights gun laws through executive order, knowing that Congressional passage is almost impossible. So, can he get away with it? Can Congress stop him? Short answers, yes and no. Congress can overturn an executive order but that overturning then has to go back to Obama for his signature. Fat chance. In 1983, SCOTUS ruled that overturning an executive order can be done only by a super-majority of Congress.

Executive Orders only apply to the running of the Executive branch of government. They may not be used to circumvent constitutional protections or the authority of the Legislative branch...but somebody may have to get their heads slapped around first, just to get their attention on this.

8
posted on 01/09/2013 12:14:43 PM PST
by PowderMonkey
(WILL WORK FOR AMMO)

Executive Orders are unconstitutional. Always have been. Only the legislative branch of government has the authority, under the Constitution, to establish laws.

Weve let this go un-checked since FDRs days. Needs to stopNOW!

Why then have we/cong/sen allowed it in the past. Where does the constitution say that? I want to know so I can allert my representatives or at least one beanhead, Mary Landrieu the rest are on our side.

I’ll bet the NRA has a lawsuit ready to file within 24 hrs of O trying such a thing, and they won’t be alone in challenging this all the way to SCOTUS. They would welcome the opportunity to get a definitve ruling. Obama will not welcome such a ruling; he will surely lose. Biden’s suggestion is a trial balloon.

18
posted on 01/09/2013 12:23:15 PM PST
by Wiser now
(Socialism does not eliminate poverty, it guarantees it.)

I thought from the beginning he would do it by executive order. Back some months ago, remember he said when the congress doesn't act on what he wants, he will do it by executive order. If you remember, he made millions of illegal aliens, legal, by executive order several months ago.

He sees himself as Idi Amin did when he anointed himself - “His Excellency President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea, and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular.”

Just stick Hussein in the above title and insert “Conqueror of the USA” where Amin says “British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular.”

First of all I did not say that certain regulations are not Constitutional... there are limits on Free Speech... Look up INFRINGEMENT... THAT is illegal. Secondly you should be more concerned with Heller vs DC. Want my guns... come and get them... bring body bags.

Second, let me say what I’ve been saying to many people who are going all “chicken little” about an AWB—CHILL OUT!

I work in DC for a lobby firm and before that I spent 2 years working as a staffer on Capitol Hill for now retired Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and still have many contacts on the Hill. I’m also very close friends with several NRA-ILA lobbyists, including the head of their federal affairs division, who is a friend of mine so I have first hand knowledge of what I speak.

While we should all be politically active and aware, the realistic odds of a new ban passing this Congress is unlikely IMPO. Obama couldn’t get one passed in ‘09 when the Dems controlled both houses of congress with super-majorities. I can’t conceive of a scenario where the GOP House majority —especially the Tea Party elements of it— would go along and pass this nonsense. My contacts are all telling me that there is ZERO appetite in the House to take up any AWB.

Remember, just because a bill is introduced doesn’t mean it goes anywhere. There are anywhere between 8-10K bills that get introduced every Congress (which is 2 yrs long) and the vast majority of them die in the bowls of a committee somewhere and that is where I predict the AWB bills will end up. Even in the Senate, there are enough GOP senators still there to filibuster and block any bill that gets brought up there.

So again, we should all be active, writing our reps and paying attention, but let’s not get overcome by fear, remain rational and grounded in reality.
__________________

“Executive orders only apply to the administration of the executive branch of government.”

Yes, so he spells out the rules in his executive order that orders whichever agency to register guns, prevent them from being sold, prevent magazines from being sold, prevent ammo from being sold, etc... all for the safety of the people.

That's how he legalized millions of illegals, ordering ICE not to deport anyone who.....

Article I, Section. 8
(Congress)
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Article II, Section 1 regarding the president—no where does it say this office can create laws. This office is only to “administer the law” or to approve it or veto it. Congress creates the laws, not the president. And in many cases, Executive Orders establishes “laws” and directives of law.

Having any president issue Executive Orders, create laws, violates the intent of the Constitution’s “balance of power” given the executive, legislative and judicial branches separation of powers.

Executive Orders, as I understand it, are part of the Emergency Powers given to the President by Congress. They gave the Pres the powers to “write law” in an emergency and also gave him the power to declare the emergency. Neat trick, huh. The US has simply been kept in an State of Emergency by every President since FDR I believe.
Read an EO. It always starts, “By the powers granted to me by the Emergency Powers Act, or something like that.

Executive Orders are unconstitutional. Always have been. Only the legislative branch of government has the authority, under the Constitution, to establish laws.

_________________________________________________
Folks stop and think about this. An Executive Order is an order to Executive Branch employees. It does not create general laws which the public must follow. What he can try to do is direct federal law enforcement and military to execute existing laws against us, but he can not make public law. How this all will work out remains to be seen. The biggest threat is if he declares martial law, since then existing laws on the books will give him broad powers to suspend various rights and screw us over.

Very good to know, except one has to believe in the constitution to begin with. For a long time we have had closet socialists calling themselves democrats in government. Now that they have been empowered by the election of a left of left presidents they are making all their dreams come true. I am truly sick about how quickly they have galvanized and executed their policies over America’s citizens. Words fail me. My heart is breaking for our future. But, like others, I’ll never give up on America and our constitution.

The president only has the authority granted to him by the constitution and the bill of rights specifically forbids him from infringing on our right to keep and bear arms.

Leaving the sleeping dog that is the Emancipation Proclamation lie. It is worth noting that Frank Roosevelt was able to intern American citizen's without due process during World War II; his newly expanded and democrat supporter packed Supreme court ok'd the decision as constitutional.

The problem is that someone has to be willing to stand up and say no when unconstitutional laws and decrees are made. Few are willing to take Andrew Jackson's view of the court and tell them to enforce their decision.

Ultimately governments rule by the consent of the governed... Make Obama enforce his stupid rules.

Executive orders only apply to the administration of the executive branch of government.

They aren't laws. They are bureaucratic rules for bureaucrats.

That's the way I've always understood this subject, though I was aware of the "Emergency Powers" aspect as well. Some Executive Orders are eventually made part of the U.S. Code.

One example is E.O. 13423, issued 2007. This directed a shift of federal fleet vehicle usage away from petroleum and toward alternative fuels. It was later tacked onto the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act and signed into law.

I guess the real question is, can an E.O. that is *not* codified into federal law be used to issue warrants of search and seizure, or anything of that sort?

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.